US Proposes Staggering $70,000 Fee for Foreign Students' Post-Study Work

The Trump administration has ignited a firestorm with a new rule proposing a hefty $70,000 fee for international students seeking to participate in the Optional Practical Training (OPT) program, which allows them to work in the U.S. after graduation. This latest move, unveiled by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on October 7, 2026, also tacks on an additional $30,000 for any OPT extensions, including the popular STEM OPT program, meaning colleges could face up to $100,000 per student. The proposed rule, set to be published in the Federal Register today, aims to force educational institutions, rather than the students themselves, to foot this exorbitant bill, sparking immediate concern across the higher education sector and among international talent. This dramatic fee hike, framed by DHS as a measure to curb fraud and abuse while protecting American jobs from 'cheap foreign labor,' comes amidst a broader immigration crackdown by the Trump administration that has seen increased scrutiny on foreign student visas and employment pathways. Critics, including university leaders and industry groups, are fiercely pushing back, arguing the fees would effectively dismantle the U.S.'s international talent pipeline. They warn it would drive bright F-1 nonimmigrant students to competitor nations like Canada, the UK, and Australia, jeopardizing American innovation, economic growth, and even potentially forcing U.S. universities to raise tuition for domestic students to offset lost international revenue. The proposal is now entering a 30-day public comment period, a critical window for affected parties to voice their opposition before DHS can finalize the rule. However, even if the rule clears this phase, it is widely anticipated to face swift legal challenges from a coalition of educational institutions and business associations, potentially delaying or even blocking its implementation. This escalating battle over foreign student employment underscores a contentious policy clash with far-reaching implications for the future of U.S. competitiveness and the global exchange of talent.